THE WORKS

OF

THE RIGHT HONOURABLE

EDMUND BURKE

IN TWELVE VOLUMES

VOLUME THE NINTH

London

JOHN C. NIMMO

14, KING WILLIAM STREET, STRAND, W.C.

MDCCCLXXXVII

CONTENTS OF VOL IX.

Page

ARTICLES OF CHARGE OF HIGH CRIMES AND

MISDEMEANORS AGAINST WARREN HASTINGS, ESQUIRE,

LATE GOVERNOR-GENERAL OF BENGAL: PRESENTED TO THE

HOUSE OF COMMONS IN APRIL AND MAY, 1786. ARTICLES

VII. -XXII.

ART. VII. CONTRACTS3

VIII. PRESENTS22

IX. RESIGNATION OF THE OFFICE OF GOVERNOR-GENERAL42

X. SURGEON-GENERAL'S CONTRACT60

XI. CONTRACTS FOR POOLBUNDY REPAIRS60

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#ARTICLES_OF_CHARGEhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#ARTICLES_OF_CHARGEhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#ARTICLES_OF_CHARGEhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#ARTICLES_OF_CHARGEhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#ARTICLES_OF_CHARGEhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#VII_CONTRACTShttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#VII_CONTRACTShttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#VIII_PRESENTShttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#VIII_PRESENTShttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#IX_RESIGNATION_OF_THE_OFFICE_OF_GOVERNOR_GENERALhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#IX_RESIGNATION_OF_THE_OFFICE_OF_GOVERNOR_GENERALhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#X_SURGEON_GENERALS_CONTRACThttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#X_SURGEON_GENERALS_CONTRACThttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XI_CONTRACTS_FOR_POOLBUNDY_REPAIRShttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XI_CONTRACTS_FOR_POOLBUNDY_REPAIRS

XII. CONTRACTS FOR OPIUM63

XIII. APPOINTMENT OF R.J. SULIVAN70

XIV. RANNA OF GOHUD72

XV. REVENUES

o PART I.79

o PART II.87

XVI. MISDEMEANORS IN OUDE95

XVII. MAHOMED REZA KHN 179

XVIII. THE MOGUL DELIVERED UP TO THE MAHRATTAS202

XIX. LIBEL ON THE COURT OF DIRECTORS228

XX. MAHRATTA WAR AND PEACE238

XXI. CORRESPONDENCE266

XXII. FYZOOLA KHN

o PART I. RIGHTS OF FYZOOLA KHN, ETC.,

BEFORE THE TREATY OF LALL-DANG268

o PART II. RIGHTS OF FYZOOLA KHN UNDER THE

TREATY OF LALL-DANG275

o PART III. GUARANTY OF THE TREATY OF LALL-

DANG278

o PART IV. THANKS OF THE BOARD TO FYZOOLA

KHN286

o PART V. DEMAND OF FIVE THOUSAND

HORSE287

o PART VI. TREATY OF CHUNAR296

o PART VII. CONSEQUENCES OF THE TREATY OF

CHUNAR302

o PART VIII. PECUNIARY COMMUTATION OF THE

STIPULATED AID306

o PART IX. FULL VINDICATION OF FYZOOLA

KHN BY MAJOR PALMER AND MR.

HASTINGS313

APPENDIX TO THE EIGHTH AND SIXTEENTH CHARGES319

SPEECHES IN THE IMPEACHMENT OF WARREN HASTINGS,

ESQUIRE, LATE GOVERNOR-GENERAL OF BENGAL.

SPEECH IN OPENING THE IMPEACHMENT.

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XII_CONTRACTS_FOR_OPIUMhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XII_CONTRACTS_FOR_OPIUMhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XIII_APPOINTMENT_OF_RJ_SULIVANhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XIII_APPOINTMENT_OF_RJ_SULIVANhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XIV_RANNA_OF_GOHUDhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XIV_RANNA_OF_GOHUDhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XV_REVENUEShttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_Iahttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_Iahttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_IIahttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_IIahttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XVI_MISDEMEANORS_IN_OUDEhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XVI_MISDEMEANORS_IN_OUDEhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XVII_MAHOMED_REZA_KHANhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XVII_MAHOMED_REZA_KHANhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XVIII_THE_MOGUL_DELIVERED_UP_TO_THE_MAHRATTAShttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XVIII_THE_MOGUL_DELIVERED_UP_TO_THE_MAHRATTAShttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XIX_LIBEL_ON_THE_COURT_OF_DIRECTORShttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XIX_LIBEL_ON_THE_COURT_OF_DIRECTORShttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XX_MAHRATTA_WAR_AND_PEACEhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XX_MAHRATTA_WAR_AND_PEACEhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XXI_CORRESPONDENCEhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XXI_CORRESPONDENCEhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#XXII_FYZOOLA_KHANhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_Ibhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_Ibhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#Page_268http://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_IIbhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_IIbhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#Page_275http://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_IIIbhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_IIIbhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#Page_278http://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_IVbhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_IVbhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#Page_286http://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_Vbhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_Vbhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#Page_287http://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_VIbhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_VIbhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_VIIbhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_VIIbhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#Page_302http://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_VIIIbhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_VIIIbhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#Page_306http://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_IXbhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_IXbhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_IXbhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#PART_IXbhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#APPENDIXhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#APPENDIXhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#SPEECHEShttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#SPEECHEShttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#SPEECHES

FIRST DAY: FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1788329

SECOND DAY; SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 16396

ARTICLES OF CHARGE

OF

HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS

AGAINST

WARREN HASTINGS, ESQUIRE,

LATE GOVERNOR -GENERAL OF BENGAL:

PRESENTED TO THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

IN APRIL AND MAY, 1786.

ARTICLES VII. -XXII.

VII. CONTRACTS.

That the Court of Directors of the East India Company had laid down the following

fundamental rules for the conduct of such of the Company's business in Bengal as

could be performed by contract, and had repeatedly and strictly ordered the

Governor and Council of Port William to observe those rules, viz.: That all

contracts should be publicly advertised, and the most reasonable proposals

accepted; that the contracts of provisions, and for furnishing draught and carriage

bullocks for the army, should be annual; and that they should not fail to advertise

for and receive proposals for those contracts every year.

That the said Warren Hastings, in direct disobedience to the said positive orders,

and, as the Directors themselves say, by a most deliberate breach of his duty, did, in

September, 1777, accept of proposals offered by Ernest Alexander Johnson for

providing draught and carriage bullocks, and for victualling the Europeans, without

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#SPEECHahttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#SPEECHahttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#SPEECHbhttp://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#SPEECHb

advertising for proposals, as he was expressly commanded to do, and extended the

contract for three years, which was positively ordered to be annual, and,

notwithstanding that extension of the period, which ought at least to have been

compensated by some advantage to the Company in the conditions, did conclude the

said contract upon terms less advantageous than the preceding contract, and

therefore not on the lowest terms procurable. That the said Warren Hastings, in

defiance of the judgment and lawful orders of his superiors, which in this case left

him no option, declared, that he disapproved of publishing for proposals, and that

the contract was reduced too low already: thereby avowing himself the advocate of

the contractor, against whom, as representative of the Company, and guardian of

their interests, he properly was party, and preferring the advantage of the contractor

to those of his own constituents and employers. That the Court of Directors of the

East India Company, having carefully considered the circumstances and tendency of

this transaction, condemned it in the strongest terms, declaring, that they would not

permit the contract to be continued, and that, "if the contractor should think himself

aggrieved, and take measures in consequence by which the Company became

involved in loss or damage, they should certainly hold the majority of the Council

responsible for such loss or damage, and proceed against them accordingly."That

the said Warren Hastings, in defiance of orders, which the Directors say were plain

and unequivocal, did, in January, 1777, receive from George Templer a proposal

essentially different from the advertisement published by the Governor-General and

Council for receiving proposals for feeding the Company's elephants, and did accept

thereof, not only without having recourse to the proper means for ascertaining

whether the said proposal was the lowest that would be offered, but with another

actually before the board nearly thirty per cent lower than that made by the said

George Templer, to whom the said Warren Hastings granted a contract, in the terms

proposed by the said Templer, for three years, and did afterwards extend the same to

five years, with new and distinct conditions, accepted by the said Warren Hastings,

without advertising for fresh proposals, by which the Company were very

considerable losers: on all which the Court of Directors declared, "that this waste of

their property could not be permitted; that he, the said Warren Hastings, had

disregarded their authority, and disobeyed their orders, in not taking the lowest

offers"; and they ordered that the contract for elephants should be annulled: and the

said Directors further declared, that, "if the contractor should recover damages of the

Company for breach of engagement, they were determined, in such case, to institute

a suit at law against those members of the board who had presumed, in direct breach

of their orders, to prefer the interest of an individual to that of the Company."That

the said Warren Hastings did, in the year 1777, conclude with Forde a contract

for an armed vessel for the pilotage of the Chittagong river, and for the defence of

the coast and river against the incursions of robbers, for the term of five years, in

further disobedience of the Company's orders respecting the mode and duration of

contracts, and with a considerable increase of expense to the Company. That the

farming out the defence of a country to a contractor, being wholly unprecedented,

and evidently absurd, could have no real object but to enrich the contractor at the

Company's expense: since either the service was not dangerous, and then the

establishment was totally unnecessary, or, if it was a dangerous service, it was

evidently the interest of the contractor to avoid such danger, and not to hazard the

loss of his ship or men, which must be replaced at his own expense, and therefore

that an active and faithful discharge of the contractor's duty was incompatible with

his interest. That the said Warren Hastings, in further defiance of the Company's

orders, and in breach of the established rule of their service, did, in the year 1777,

conclude a contract with the master and deputy master attendant of the Company's

marine or pilot service, for supplying the said marine with naval stores, and executing

the said service for the term of two years, and without advertising for proposals. That

the use and expenditure of such stores and the direction of the pilot vessels are under

the management and at the disposition of the master attendant by virtue of his office;

that he is officially the proper and regular check upon the person who furnishes the

stores, and bound by his duty to take care that all contracts for furnishing such stores

are duly and faithfully executed. That the said Warren Hastings, by uniting the supply

and the check in the same hands, did not only disobey the Company's specific orders,

and violate the fundamental rules and practice of the service, but did overset the only

just and rational principle on which this and every other service of a similar nature

ought to be conducted, and did not only subject the Company's interest, in point of

expense, to fraud and collusion, but did thereby expose the navigation of the Bengal

river to manifest hazard and distress: considering that it is the duty of the master

attendant to take care that the pilot vessels are constantly stationed in the roads to

wait the arrival of the Company's ships, especially in tempestuous weather, and that

they should be in a constant condition to keep the sea; whereas it is manifestly the

interest of the contractor, in the first instance, to equip the said vessels as scantily as

possible, and afterwards to expose them as little as possible to any service in which

the stores to be replaced by him might be lost or consumed. And, finally, that in June,

1779, the said contract was prolonged to the said master attendant, by the said Warren

Hastings, for the further period of two years from the expiration of the first, without

advertising for proposals.That it does not appear that any of the preceding

contracts have been annulled, or the charges attending any of them abated, or that the

Court of Directors have ever taken any measures to compel the said Warren Hastings

to indemnify the Company, or to make good any part of the loss incurred by the said

contracts.

That in the year 1777 the said Warren Hastings did recommend and appoint John

Belli, at that time his private secretary, to be agent for supplying the garrison of Fort

William with victualling stores; that the stores were to be purchased with money

advanced by the Company, and that the said agent was to be allowed a commission

or percentage for his risk and trouble; that, in order to ascertain what sum would be

a reasonable compensation for the agent, the Governor-General and Council agreed

to consult some of the principal merchants of Calcutta; that the merchants so

consulted reported their opinion, that twenty per cent on the prime cost of the stores

would be a reasonable compensation to the agent; that, nevertheless, the said Warren

Hastings, supported by the vote and concurrence of Richard Barwell, then a member

of the Supreme Council, did propose and carry it, that thirty per cent per annum

should be allowed upon all stores to be provided by the agent. That the said Warren

Hastings professed that "he preferred an agency to a contract for this service,

because, if it were performed by contract, it must then be advertised, and the world

would know what provision was made for the defence of the fort": as if its being

publicly known that the fort was well provided for defence were likely to encourage

an enemy to attack it. That in August, 1779, in defiance of the principle laid down

by himself for preferring an agency to a contract, the said Warren Hastings did

propose and carry it, that the agency should be converted into a contract, to be

granted to the said John Belli, without advertising for proposals, and fixed for the

term of five years, "pretending that he had received frequent remonstrances from

the said agent concerning the heavy losses and inconveniences to which he

was subjected by the indefinite terms of his agency," notwithstanding it appeared by

evidence produced at the board, that, on a supply of about 37,000l., he had already

drawn a commission of 22,000l. and upwards. That the said Warren Hastings pledged

himself, that, if required by the Court of Directors, the profits arising from the agency

should be paid into the Company's treasury, and appropriated as the Court should

direct. That the Court of Directors, as soon as they were advised of the first

appointment of the said agency, declared that they considered the commission of

twenty per cent as an ample compensation to the agent, and did positively order, that,

according to the engagement of the said Warren Hastings, "the commission paid or

to be paid to the said agent should be reduced to twenty pounds per cent." That the

said John Belli did positively refuse to refund any part of the profits he had received,

or to submit to a diminution of those which he was still to receive; and that the said

Warren Hastings has never made good his own voluntary and solemn engagement to

the Court of Directors hereinabove mentioned: and as his failure to perform the said

engagement is a breach of faith to the Company, so his performance of such

engagement, if he had performed it, and even his offering to pledge himself for the

agent, in the first instance, ought to be taken as presumptive evidence of a connection

between the said Warren Hastings and the said agent, his private secretary, which

ought not to exist between a Governor acting in behalf of the Company and a

contractor making terms with such Governor for the execution of a public service.

That, before the expiration of the contract hereinbefore mentioned for supplying

the army with draught and carriage bullocks, granted by the said Warren Hastings to

Ernest Alexander Johnson for three years, the said Warren Hastings did propose and

carry it in Council, that a new contract should be made on a new plan, and that an

offer thereof should be made to Richard Johnson, brother and executor of the said

contractor, without advertising for proposals, for the term of five years; that this offer

was voluntarily accepted by the said Richard Johnson, who at the same time desired

and obtained that the new contracts should be made out in the name of Charles

Croftes, the Company's accountant and sub-treasurer at Fort William; that the said

Charles Croftes offered the said Richard Johnson as one of his securities for

the performance of the said contract, who was accepted as such by the said Warren

Hastings; and that, at the request of the said contractor, the contract for victualling

the Europeans serving at the Presidency was added to and united with that for

furnishing bullocks, and fixed for the same period. That this extension of the periods

of the said contracts was not compensated by a diminution in the charge to be

incurred by the Company on that account, as it ought to have been, but, on the

contrary, the charge was immoderately increased by the new contracts, insomuch

that it was proved by statements and computations produced at the board, that the

increase on the victualling contract would in five years amount to 40,000l., and that

the increase on the bullock contract in the same period would amount to above

400,000l. That, when this and many other weighty objections against the terms of the

said contracts were urged in Council to the said Warren Hastings, he declared that he

should deliver a reply thereto; but it does not appear that he did ever deliver such

reply, or ever enter into a justification of any part of his conduct in this transaction.

That the act of Parliament of 1773, by which the first Governor-General and Council

were appointed, did expressly limit the duration of their office to the term of five

years, which expired in October, 1779, and that the several contracts hereinbefore

mentioned were granted in September, 1779, and were made to continue five years

after the expiration of the government by which they were granted. That by this

anticipation the discretion and judgment of the succeeding government respecting

the subject-matter of such contracts was taken away, and any correction or

improvement therein rendered impracticable. That the said Warren Hastings might

have been justified by the rules and practice or by the necessity of the public service

in binding the government by engagements to endure one year after the expiration of

his own office; but on no principles could he be justified in extending such

engagements beyond the term of one year, much less on the principles he has

avowed, namely, "that it was only an act of common justice in him to secure every

man connected with him, as far as he legally could, from the apprehension of future

oppression." That the oppression to which such apprehension, if real, must allude,

could only consist in and arise out of the obedience which he feared a future

government might pay to the orders of the Court of Directors, by making all

contracts annual, and advertising for proposals publicly and indifferently from all

persons whatever, by which it might happen that such beneficial contracts would not

be constantly held by men connected with him, the said Warren Hastings. That this

declaration, made by the said Warren Hastings, combined with all the circumstances

belonging to these transactions, leaves no room to doubt, that, in disobeying the

Company's orders, and betraying the trust reposed in him as guardian of the

Company's property, his object was to purchase the attachment of a number of

individuals, and to form a party capable of supporting and protecting him in return.

That, with the same view, and on the same principles, it appears that excessive

salaries and emoluments, at the East India Company's charge and expense, have been

lavished by the said Warren Hastings to sundry individuals, contrary to the general

principles of his duty, and in direct contradiction to the positive orders of the Court

of Directors: particularly, that, whereas by a resolution of the Court of Proprietors of

the East India Company, and by an instruction of the Court of Directors, it was

provided and expressly ordered that there should be paid to the late Sir John

Clavering "the sum of six thousand pounds sterling per annum in full for his services

as commander-in-chief, in lieu of travelling charges and of all other advantages and

emoluments whatever," and whereas the Court of Directors positively ordered that

the late "Sir Eyre Coote should receive the same pay as commander-in-chief of their

forces in India as was received by Lieutenant-General Sir John Clavering," the said

Warren Hastings, nevertheless, within a very short time after Sir Eyre Coote's arrival

in Bengal, did propose and carry it in Council, that a new establishment should be

created for Sir Eyre Coote, by which an increase of expense would be incurred by

the India Company to the amount of eighteen thousand pounds a year and upwards,

exclusive of and in addition to his salary of ten thousand pounds a year, provided for

him by act of Parliament as a member of the Supreme Council, and exclusive of and

in addition to his salary of six thousand pounds a year as commander-in-chief,

appointed for him by the Company, and expressly fixed to that amount.

That the disobedience and breach of trust of which the said Warren Hastings was

guilty in this transaction is highly aggravated by the following circumstances

connected with it. That from the death of Sir John Clavering to the arrival of Sir Eyre

Coote in Bengal the provisional command of the army had devolved to and been

vested in Brigadier-General Giles Stibbert, the eldest officer on that establishment.

That in this capacity, and, as the said Warren Hastings has declared, "standing no

way distinguished from the other officers in the army, but by his accidental

succession to the first place on the list," he, the said Giles Stibbert, had, by the

recommendation and procurement of the said Warren Hastings, received and enjoyed

a salary, and other allowances, to the amount of 13,854l. 12s. per annum. That Sir

Eyre Coote, soon after his arrival, represented to the board that a considerable part

of those allowances, amounting to 8,220l.10s. per annum, ought to devolve to

himself, as commander-in-chief of the Company's forces in India, and, stating that

the said Giles Stibbert could no longer be considered as commander-in-chief under

the Presidency of Fort William, made a formal demand of the same. That the said

Warren Hastings, instead of reducing the allowances of the said Giles Stibbert to the

establishment at which they stood during General Clavering's command, and for the

continuance of which after Sir Eyre Coote's arrival there could be no pretence,

continued the allowances of 13,854l. 12s. per annum to the said Giles Stibbert, and

at the same time, in order to appease and satisfy the demand of the said Sir Eyre

Coote, did create for him that new establishment, hereinbefore specified, of eighteen

thousand pounds per annum,insomuch that, instead of the allowance of six

thousand pounds a year, in lieu of travelling charges, and of all emoluments and

allowances whatsoever, to which the pay and allowances of commander-in-chief

were expressly limited by the united act of the legislative and executive powers of

the Company, the annual charge to be borne by the Company on that account was

increased by the said Warren Hastings to the enormous sum of thirty-eight thousand

two hundred and seventeen pounds ten shillings sterling.

That on the 1st of November, 1779, the said Warren Hastings did move and carry

it in Council, "that the Resident at the Vizier's court should be furnished with an

account of all the extra allowances and charges of the commander-in-chief when in

the field, with orders to add the same to the debit of the Vizier's account, as a part of

his general subsidy,the charge to commence from the day on which the general

shall pass the Caramnassa, and to continue till his return to the same line." That this

additional expense imposed by the said Warren Hastings on the Vizier was unjust in

itself, and a breach of treaty with that prince: the specific amount of the subsidy to

be paid by him having been fixed by a treaty, to which no addition could justly be

made, but at the previous requisition of the Vizier. That the Court of Directors, in

their letter of the 18th of October, 1780, did condemn and prohibit the continuation

of the allowances above mentioned to Sir Eyre Coote in the following words: "These

allowances appear to us in a light so very extraordinary, and so repugnant to the spirit

of a resolution of the General Court of Proprietors respecting the allowance made to

General Clavering, that we positively direct that they be discontinued immediately,

and no part thereof paid after the receipt of this letter." That on the 27th of April,

1781, the Governor-General and Council, in obedience to the orders of the Directors,

did signify the same to the Commissary-General, as an instruction to him that the

extraordinary allowances to Sir Eyre Coote should be discontinued, and no part

thereof paid after that day. That it appears, nevertheless, that the said extra

allowances (amounting to above twenty thousand pounds sterling a year) were

continued to be charged to the Vizier, and paid to Sir Eyre Coote, in defiance of the

orders of the Court of Directors, in defiance of the consequent resolution of the

Governor-General and Council, and in contradiction to the terms of the original

motion made by the said Warren Hastings for adding those allowances to the debit

of the Vizier, viz., "that they should continue till Sir Eyre Coote's return to the

Caramnassa." That Sir Eyre Coote arrived at Calcutta about the end of August, 1780,

and must have crossed the Caramnassa, in his return from Oude, some weeks before,

when the charge on the Vizier, if at any time proper, ought to have ceased. That it

appears that the said allowances were continued to be charged against the Vizier and

paid to Sir Eyre Coote for three years after, even while he was serving in the Carnatic,

and that this was done by the sole authority and private command of the said Warren

Hastings.

That the East India Company having thought proper to create the office of

Advocate-General in Bengal, and to appoint Sir John Day to that office, it was

resolved by a General Court of Proprietors that a salary of three thousand pounds a

year should be allowed to the said Sir John Day, in full consideration of all demands

and allowances whatsoever for his services to the Company at the Presidency of Fort

William. That the said Warren Hastings, nevertheless, shortly after Sir John Day's

arrival in Bengal, did increase the said Sir John Day's salary and allowances to six

thousand pounds a year, in direct disobedience of the resolution of the Court of

Proprietors, and of the order of the Court of Directors. That the Directors, as soon as

they were informed of this proceeding, declared, "that they held themselves bound

by the resolution of the General Court, and that they could not allow it to be

disregarded by the Company's servants in India," and ordered that the increased

allowances should be forthwith discontinued. That the said Warren Hastings, after

having first thought it necessary, in obedience to the orders of the Court of Directors,

to stop the extraordinary allowance which he had granted to Sir John Day, did

afterwards resolve that the allowance which had been struck off should be repaid to

him, upon his signing an obligation to refund the amount which he might receive, in

case the Directors should confirm their former orders, already twice given. That in

this transaction the said Warren Hastings trifled with the authority of the Company,

eluded the repeated orders of the Directors, and exposed the Company to the risk and

uncertainty of recovering, at a distant period, and perhaps by a process of law, a sum

of money which they had positively ordered him not to pay.

That in the latter part of the year 1776, by the death of Colonel Monson, the whole

power of the government of Fort William devolved to the Governor and one member

of the Council; and that from that time the Governor-General and Council have

generally consisted of an even number of persons, in consequence of which the

casting voice of the said Warren Hastings has usually prevailed in the decision of all

questions. That about the end of the year 1776 the whole civil establishment of the

said government did not exceed 205,399l. per annum; that in the year1783 the said

civil establishment had been increased to the enormous annual sum of 927,945l. That

such increase in the civil establishment could not have taken place, if the said Warren

Hastings, who was at the head of the government, with the power annexed to the

casting voice, had not actively promoted the said increase, which he had power to

prevent, and which it was his duty to have prevented. That by such immoderate waste

of the property of his employers, and by such scandalous breach of his fidelity to

them, it was the intention of the said Warren Hastings to gain and secure the

attachment and support of a multitude of individuals, by whose united interest,

influence, and intrigues he hoped to be protected against any future inquiry into his

conduct. That it was of itself highly criminal in the said Warren Hastings to have so

wasted the property of the East India Company, and that the purpose to be obtained

by such waste was a great aggravation of that crime.

That among the various instances of profusion by which the civil establishment of

Fort William was increased to the enormous annual sum hereinbefore mentioned, it

appears that a Salt Office was created, of six commissioners, whose annual

emoluments were as follows, viz.:

President, or Comptroller, per annum 18,480

1st member 13,100

2d do 11,480

3d do 13,183

4th do 6,257

5th do 10,307

72,807

That a Board of Revenue was created by the said Warren Hastings, consisting of

five commissioners, whose annual emoluments were as follows, viz.:

1st member, per annum 10,950

2d do 9,100

3d do 9,100

4th do 9,100

5th do 9,100

46,350

That David Anderson, Esquire, first member of the said board, did not execute the

duties, though he received the emoluments of the said office: having acted, for the

greatest part of the time, as ambassador to Mahdajee Sindia, with a further salary of

4,280l. a year, making in all 15,230l. a year. That the said Warren Hastings did create

an office of Agent-Victualler to the garrison of Fort William, whose profits, on an

average of three years, were 15,970l. per annum. That this agency was held by the

Postmaster-General, who in that capacity received 2,200l. a year from the Company,

and who was actually no higher than a writer in the service. That the person who held

these lucrative offices, viz., John Belli, was private secretary to the said Warren

Hastings.

That the said Warren Hastings created a nominal office of Resident at Goa, where

the Company never had a Resident, nor business of any kind to transact, and gave

the said nominal office to a person who was not a covenanted servant of the

Company, with an allowance of 4,280l. a year.

That these instances are proofs of a criminal profusion and high breach of trust to

the India Company in the said Warren Hastings, under whose government, and by

means of whose special power, derived from the effect of his casting voice, all the

said waste and profusion did take place.

That at the end of the year 1780, when, as the Court of Directors affirm, the

Company were in the utmost distress for money, and almost every department in

arrear, and when it appears that there was a great scarcity and urgent want of grain

at Fort St. George, the said Warren Hastings did accept of a proposal made to him

by James Peter Auriol, then Secretary to the Council, to supply the Presidency of

Fort St. George with rice and other articles, and did appoint the said Auriol to be the

agent for supplying all the other Presidencies with those articles; that the said Warren

Hastings declared that the intention of the appointment "was most likely to be

fulfilled by a liberal consideration of it," and therefore allowed the said Auriol a

commission of fifteen per cent on the whole of his disbursements, thereby rendering

it the direct interest of the said Auriol to make his disbursements as great as possible;

that the chance of capture by the enemy, or danger of the sea, was to be at the risk of

the India Company, and not of the said Auriol; that the said Warren Hastings declared

personally to the said Auriol, "that this post was intended as a reward for his long

and faithful services." That the President and Council of Bombay did remonstrate

against what they called the enormous amount of the charges of the rice with which

they wore supplied, which they state to be nine rupees a bag at Calcutta, when they

themselves could have contracted for its delivery at Bombay, free of all risk and

charges, at five rupees and three sixteenths per bag; and that even at Madras, where

the distress and demand was greatest, the supplies of grain by private traders, charged

to the Company, were nineteen per cent cheaper than that supplied by the said Auriol,

exclusive of the risk of the sea and of capture by the enemy. That it is stated by the

Court of Directors, that the agent's commission on a supply of a single year (the said

commission being not only charged on the prime cost of the rice, but also on the

freight and all other charges) would amount to pounds sterling 26,873, and by the

said Auriol himself is admitted to amount to 18,292l. That William Larkins, the

Accountant-General at Port William, having been ordered to examine the accounts

of the said agent, did report to the Governor-General and Council, that he found them

to be correct in the additions and calculations; and that then the said Larkins adds

the following declaration: "The agentbeing upon honor with respect to the sums

charged in his accounts for the cost of the articles supplied, I did not think myself

authorized to require any voucher of the sums charged for the demurrage of sloops,

either as to the time of detention or the rate of the charge, or of those for the articles

lost in going down the river; and on that ground I thought myself equally bound to

admit the sums acknowledged as received for the sales of goods returned, without

requiring vouchers of the rates at which they were sold." That in this transaction the

said Warren Hastings has been guilty of a high breach of trust and duty, in the

unnecessary expenditure of the Company's money, and in subjecting the Company

to a profusion of expense, at all times wholly unjustifiable, but particularly at the

time when that expense was incurred. That the said Warren Hastings was guilty of

breach of orders, as well as breach of trust, in not advertising generally for proposals;

in not contracting indifferently for the supplies with such merchants as might offer

to furnish them on the lowest terms; in giving an enormous commission to an agent,

and that commission not confined to the prime cost of the articles, but to be computed

on the whole of his charges; in accepting of the honor of the said agent as a sufficient

voucher for the cost of the articles supplied, and for all charges whatever on which

his commission was to be computed; and finally, in giving a lucrative agency for the

supply of a distressed and starving province as a reward to a Secretary of State, whose

labors in that capacity ought to have been rewarded by an avowed public salary, and

not otherwise. That, after the first year of the said agency was expired, the said

Warren Hastings did agree, that, for the future, the commission to be drawn by the

said agent should be reduced to five per cent, which the Governor-General and

Council then declared to be the customary, amount drawn by merchants; but that

even in this reduction of the commission the said Warren Hastings was guilty of a

deception, and did not in fact reduce the commission from fifteen to five per cent,

having immediately after resolved that he, the agent, should be allowed the current

interest of Calcutta upon all his drafts on the Treasury from the day of their dates,

until they should be completely liquidated; that the legal interest of money in Bengal

is twelve per cent per annum, and the current interest from eight to ten per cent.

VIII. PRESENTS.

That, before the appointment of the Governor-General and Council of Fort William

by act of Parliament, the allowances made by the East India Company to the

Presidents of that government were abundantly sufficient; and that the said

Presidents in general, and the said Warren Hastings particularly, was restrained by

a specific covenant and indenture, which he entered into with the Company, from

accepting any gifts, rewards, or gratuities whatsoever, on any account or pretence

whatsoever. That in the Regulating Act passed in the year 1773, which appointed

the said Warren Hastings, Esquire, Governor-General of Fort William in Bengal, a

salary of twenty-five thousand pounds a year was established for him, to which the

Court of Directors added, "that he should enjoy their principal houses, with the

plate and furniture, both in town and country, rent-free." That the same law which

created the office and provided the salary of the said Warren Hastings did

expressly, and in the clearest and most comprehensive terms that could be devised,

prohibit him from receiving any present, gift, or donation, in any manner or on any

account whatsoever; and that the said Warren Hastings perfectly understood the

meaning, and acknowledged the binding force of this prohibition, before he

accepted of the office to which it was annexed: he knew, and had declared, that the

prohibition was positive and decisive; that it admitted neither of refinement or

misconstruction; and that in his opinion an opposition would be to incur the

penalty.

That, notwithstanding the covenants and engagements above mentioned, it appears

in the recorded proceedings of the Governor-General and Council of Fort William,

that sundry charges have been brought against the said Warren Hastings for gifts or

presents corruptly taken by him before the promulgation of the act of 1773 in India,

and that these charges were produced at the Council Board in the presence of the said

Warren Hastings. That, in March, 1775, the late Rajah Nundcomar, a native Hindoo,

of the highest caste in his religion, and of the highest rank in society, by the offices

which he had held under the country government, did lay before the Council an

account of various sums of money paid by him to the said Warren Hastings,

amounting to forty thousand pounds and upwards, for offices and employments

corruptly disposed of by the said Warren Hastings, and did offer and engage to prove

and establish the same by sufficient evidence. That this account is stated with a

minute particularity and precision; the date of each payment, down to that of small

sums, is specified; the various coins in which such payments were severally made

are distinguished; and the different persons through whose hands the money passed

into those of the said Warren Hastings are named. That such particularity on the face

of such a charge, supposing it false, is favorable to the party wrongfully accused, and

exposes the accuser to an instant and easy detection: for, though, as the said Warren

Hastings himself has observed on another occasion, "papers may be forged, and

evidences may appear in numbers to attest them, yet it must always be an easy matter

to detect the falsity of any forged paper produced by examining the witnesses

separately, and subjecting them to a subsequent cross-examination, in which case, if

false, they will not be able to persevere in one regular, consistent story "; whereas, if

no advantage be taken of such particularity in the charge to detect the falsehood

thereof, and if no attempt to disprove it, and no defence whatever be made, a

presumption justly and reasonably arises in favor of the truth of such charge. That

the said Warren Hastings, instead of offering anything in his defence, declared that he

would not suffer Nundcomar to appear before the board at his accuser; that he

attempted to indict his said accuser for a conspiracy, in which he failed; and that the

said Rajah Nundcomar was soon after, and while his charge against the said Warren

Hastings was depending before the Council, indicted upon an English penal statute,

which does not extend even to Scotland,[1] before the Supreme Court of Judicature,

for an offence said to have been committed several years before, and not capital by

the laws of India, and was condemned and executed. That the evidence of this man,

not having been encountered at the time when it might and ought to have been by the

said Warren Hastings, remains justly in force against him, and is not abated by the

capital punishment of the said Nundcomar, but rather confirmed by the time and

circumstances in which the accuser of the said Warren Hastings suffered death. That

one of the offices for which a part of the money above mentioned is stated to have

been paid to the said Warren Hastings was given by him to Munny Begum, the

widow of the late Mir Jaffier, Nabob of Bengal, whose son, by another woman, holds

that title at present. That the said Warren Hastings had been instructed by the Court

of Directors of the East India Company to appoint "a minister to transact the political

affairs of the government, and to select for that purpose some person well qualified

for the affairs of government, to be the minister and guardian of the Nabob's

minority." That for these offices, and for the execution of the several duties belonging

to them, the said Warren Hastings selected and appointed the said Munny Begum, a

woman evidently unqualified for and incapable of such offices, and restrained from

acting in such capacities by her necessary seclusion from the world and retirement

in a seraglio. That, a considerable deficiency or embezzlement appearing in this

woman's account of the young Nabob's stipend, she voluntarily declared, by a writing

under her seal, that she had given fifteen thousand pounds to the said Warren

Hastings for an entertainment,which declaration corresponds with and confirms

that part of the charge produced by Rajah Nundcomar to which it relates. That neither

this nor any other part of the said charge has been at any time directly denied or

disputed by the said Warren Hastings, though made to his face, and though he was

repeatedly accused by his colleagues, who were appointed by Parliament at the same

time with himself, of peculation of every sort. That, instead of promoting a strict

inquiry into his conduct for the clearance of his innocence and honor, he did

repeatedly endeavor to elude and stifle all inquiry by attempting to dissolve the

meetings of the Council at which such charges were produced, and by other means,

and has not since taken any steps to disprove or refute the same. That the said Warren

Hastings, so long ago as September, 1775, assured the Court of Directors, "that it

was his fixed determination most fully and liberally to explain every circumstance

of his conduct on the points on which he had been injuriously arraigned, and to afford

them the clearest conviction of his own integrity, and of the propriety of his motives

for declining a present defence of it"; and having never since given to the Court of

Directors any explanation whatever, much less the full and liberal explanation he had

promised so repeatedly, has thereby abandoned even that late and protracted defence

which he himself must have thought necessary to be made at some time or other, and

which he would be thought to have deferred to a period more suitable and convenient

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#Footnote_1_1

than that in which the facts were recent, and the impression of these and other charges

of the same nature against him was fresh and unimpaired in the minds of men.

That on the 30th of March, 1775, a member of the Council produced and laid

before the board a petition from Mir Zein Abul Deen, (formerly farmer of a district,

and who had been in creditable stations,) setting forth, that Khn Jehan Khn, then

Phousdar of Hoogly, had obtained that office from the said Warren Hastings, with a

salary of seventy-two thousand sicca rupees a year, and that the said Phousdar had

given a receipt of bribe to the patron of the city, meaning Warren Hastings, to pay

him annually thirty-six thousand rupees a year, and also to his banian, Cantoo Baboo,

four thousand rupees a year, out of the salary above mentioned. That by the thirty-

fifth article of the instructions given to the Governor-General and Council, they are

directed "immediately to cause the strictest inquiry to be made into all oppressions

which might have been committed either against the natives or Europeans, and into

all abuses that might have prevailed in the collection of the revenues, or any part of

the civil government of the Presidency, and to communicate to the Directors all

information which they might be able to obtain relative thereto, or to any dissipation

or embezzlement of the Company's money." That the above petition and instruction

having been read in Council, it was moved that the petitioner should be ordered to

attend the next day to make good his charge. That the said Warren Hastings declared,

"that it appeared to him to be the purpose of the majority to make him the sole object

of their personal attacks; that they had taken their line, and might pursue it; that he

should have other remarks to make upon this transaction, but, as they would be

equally applicable to many otherswhich in the course of this business were likely to

be brought before the board, he should say no more on the subject";and he objected

to the motion. That by the preceding declaration the said Warren Hastings did admit

that many other charges were likely to be brought against him, and that such charges

would be of a similar nature to the first, viz., a corrupt bargaining for the disposal of

a great office, since he declared that his remarks on that transaction would be equally

applicable to the rest; and that, by objecting to the motion for the personal attendance

of the accuser, he resisted and disobeyed the Company's instructions, and did, as far

as depended on his power, endeavor to obstruct and prevent all inquiry into the

charge. That in so doing he failed in his duty to the Company, he disobeyed their

express orders, and did leave the charge against himself without a reply, and even

without a denial, and with that unavoidable presumption against his innocence which

lies against every person accused who not only refuses to plead, but, as far as his vote

goes, endeavors to prevent an examination of the charge, and to stifle all inquiry into

the truth of it. That, the motion having been nevertheless carried, the said Warren

Hastings did, on the day following, declare, "that he could not sit to be confronted

with such accusers, nor suffer a judicial inquiry into his conduct at the board of which

he was president, and declared the meeting of the board dissolved." That the board

continued to sit and examine witnesses, servants of the Phousdar, on oath and written

evidence, being letters under the hand and seal of the Phousdar, all directly tending

to prove the charge: viz., that, out of the salary of seventy-two thousand rupees a year

paid by the Company, the said Phousdar received but thirty-two thousand, and that

the remainder was received by the said Warren Hastings and his banian. That the

Phousdar, though repeatedly ordered to attend the board, did, under various

pretences, decline attending, until the 19th of May, when, the letters stated be his,

that is, under his hand and seal, being shown to him, it was proposed by a member

of the board that he should be asked whether he had any objection to swear to the

truth of such answers as he might make to the questions proposed by the board; that

the said Warren Hastings objected to his being put to his oath; that the question was

nevertheless put to him, in consequence of a resolution of the board; that he first

declined to swear, under pretence that it was a matter of serious consequence to his

character to take an oath, and, when it was finally left to his option, hedeclared,

"Mean people might swear, but that his character would not allow him,that he

could not swear, and had rather subject himself to a loss." That the evidence in

support of the charge, being on oath, was in this manner left uncontradicted. That it

was admitted by the said Warren Hastings, that neither Mussulmen or Hindoos are

forbidden by the precepts of their religion to swear; that it is not true, as the said

Warren Hastings asserted, that it was repugnant to the manners either of Hindoos or

Mussulmen; and that, if, under such pretences, the natives were to be exempted from

taking an oath, when examined by the Governor and Council, all the inquiries pointed

out to them by the Company's instructions might stop or be defeated. That no valid

reason was or could be assigned why the said Phousdar should not be examined on

oath; that the charge was not against himself; and that, if any questions had been put

to him, tending to make him accuse himself, he might have declined to answer them.

That, if he could have safely sworn to the innocence of the said Warren Hastings,

from whom he received his employment, he was bound in gratitude as well as justice

to the said Warren Hastings to have consented to be examined on oath; that, not

having done so, and having been supported and abetted in his refusal by the said

Warren Hastings himself, whose character and honor, were immediately at stake, the

whole of the evidence for the truth of the charge remains unanswered, and in full

force against the said Warren Hastings, who on this occasion recurred to the

declaration he had before made to the Directors, viz., "that he would most fully and

liberally explain every circumstance of his conduct," but has never since that time

given the Directors any explanation whatsoever of his said conduct. And finally, that,

when the Court of Directors, in January, 1776, referred the question (concerning the

legality of the power assumed and repeatedly exercised by the said Warren Hastings,

of dissolving the Council at his pleasure) to the late Charles Sayer, then standing

counsel of the East India Company, the said Charles Sayer declared his opinion in

favor of the power, but concerning the use and exercise of it in the cases stated did

declare his opinion in the following words: "I believe he, Warren Hastings, is the

first governor that ever dissolved a council inquiring into his behavior, when he was

innocent." Before he could summon three councils, and dissolve them, he had time

fully to consider what would be the result of such conduct, to convince everybody

beyond a doubt of his conscious guilt. That, by a resolution of a majority of the

Council, constituting a lawful act of the Governor-General and Council, the said

Khn Jehan Khn was dismissed from the office of Phousdar of Hoogly for a

contempt of the authority of the board; that, within a few weeks after the death of the

late Colonel Monson, the number of the Council being then even, and all questions

being then determined by the Governor-General's casting voice, the said Warren

Hastings did move and carry it in Council, that the said Khn Jehan Khn should be

restored to his office; and that restoration, not having been preceded, accompanied,

or followed by any explanation or defence whatsoever, or even by a denial of the

specific and circumstantial charge of collusion with the said Khn Jehan Khn, has

confirmed the truth of the said charge.

That, besides the sums charged to have been paid to the said Warren Hastings by

the said Nundcomar and Munny Begum and Khn Jehan Khn, and besides the sum

of one hundred and ten thousand pounds already mentioned to have been accepted

without hesitation by him, as a present on the part of the Nabob of Oude and that of

his ministers, the circumstances of which have been particularly reported to the

House of Commons, it appears by the confession of the said Warren Hastings, that

he has at different times since the promulgation of the act of 1773, received various

other sums, contrary to the express prohibition of the said act, and his own declared

sense of the evident intent and obligation thereof.That in the month of June, 1780,

the said Warren Hastings made to the Council what he called "a very unusual tender,

by offering to exonerate the Company from the expense of a particular measure, and

to take it upon himself; declaring that he had already deposited two lacs of rupees [or

twenty-three thousand pounds] in the hands of the Company's sub-treasurer for that

service." That in a subsequent letter, dated the 29th of November, 1780, he informed

the Court of Directors, that "this money, by whatever means it came into their

possession, was not his own"; but he did not then, nor has he at any time since, made

known to the Court of Directors from whom or on what account he received that

money, as it was his duty to have done in the first instance, and notwithstanding the

said Directors signified to him their expectation that he should communicate to them

"immediate information of the channel by which this money came into his

possession, with a complete illustration of the cause or causes of so extraordinary an

event." But, from evidence examined in England, it has been discovered that this

money was received by the said Warren Hastings from Cheyt Sing, the Rajah of

Benares, who was soon after dispossessed of all his property and driven from his

country and government by the said Warren Hastings. That, notwithstanding the

declaration made by the said Warren Hastings, that he had actually deposited the sum

above mentioned in the hands of the Company's sub-treasurer for their service, it

does not appear that "any entry whatsoever of that or any other payment by the

Governor-General was made in the Treasury accounts at or about the time," nor is

there any trace in the Company's books of its being actually paid into their treasury.

It appears, then, by the confession of the said Warren Hastings, that this money was

received by him; but it does not appear that he has converted it to the property and

use of the Company.

That in a letter from the said Warren Hastings to the said Court of Directors, dated

the 22d of May, 1782, but not dispatched, as it might and ought to have been, at that

time, but detained and kept back by the said Warren Hastings till the 16th of

December following, he has confessed the receipt of various other sums, amounting

(with that which he accepted from the Nabob of Oude) to nearly two hundred

thousand pounds, which sums he affirmed had been converted to the Company's

property through his means, but without discovering from whom or on what account

he received the same. That, instead of converting this money to the Company's

property, as he affirmed he had done, it appears that he had lent the greater part of it

to the Company upon bonds bearing interest, which bonds were demanded and

received by him, and, for aught that yet appears, have never been given up or

cancelled. That for another considerable part of the above-mentioned sum he has

taken credit to himself, as for a deposit of his own property, and therefore

demandable by him out of the Company's treasury at his discretion. That all sums so

lent or deposited are not alienated from the person who lends or deposits the same;

consequently, that the declaration made by the said Warren Hastings, that he had

converted the whole of these sums to the Company's property, was not true. Nor

would such a transfer, if it had really been made, have justified the said Warren

Hastings in originally receiving the money, which, being in the first instance contrary

to law, could not be rendered legal by any subsequent disposition or application

thereof; much less would it have justified the said Warren Hastings in delaying to

make a discovery of these transactions to the Court of Directors until he had heard

of the inquiries then begun and proceeding in Parliament, in finally making a

discovery, such as it is, in terms the most intricate, obscure, and contradictory. That,

instead of that full and clear explanation of his conduct which the Court of Directors

demanded, and which the said Warren Hastings was bound to give them, he has

contented himself with telling the said Directors, that, "if this matter was to be

exposed to the view of the public, his reasons for acting as he had done might furnish

a variety of conjectures to which it would be of little use to reply; that he either chose

to conceal the first receipts from public curiosity by receiving bonds for the amount,

or possibly acted without any studied design which his memory could at that distance

of time verify; and that he could have concealed them from their eye and that of the

public forever." That the discovery, as far as it goes, establishes the guilt of the said

Warren Hastings in taking money against law, but does not warrant a conclusion that

he has discovered all that he may have taken; that, on the contrary, such discovery,

not being made in proper time, and when made being imperfect, perplexed, and

wholly unsatisfactory, leads to a just and reasonable presumption that other facts of

the same nature have been concealed, since those which he has confessed might have

been forever, and that this partial confession was either extorted from the said Warren

Hastings by the dread of detection, or made with a view of removing suspicion, and

preventing any further inquiry into his conduct.

That the said Warren Hastings, in a letter to the Court of Directors dated 21st of

February, 1784, has confessed his having privately received another sum of money,

the amount of which he has not declared, but which, from the application he says he

has made of it, could not be less than thirty-four thousand pounds sterling. That he

has not informed the Directors from whom he received this money, at what time, nor

on what account; but, on the contrary, has attempted to justify the receipt of it, which

was illegal, by the application of it, which was unauthorized and unwarrantable, and

which, if admitted as a reason for receiving money privately, would constitute a

precedent of the most dangerous nature to the Company's service. That, in attempting

to justify the receipt and application of the said money, he has endeavored to establish

principles of conduct in a Governor which tend to subvert all order and regularity in

the conduct of public business, to encourage and facilitate fraud and corruption in all

offices of pecuniary trust, and to defeat all inquiry into the misconduct of any person

in whom pecuniary trust is reposed.That the said Warren Hastings, in his letter

above mentioned, has made a declaration to the Court of Directors in the following

terms: "Having had occasion to disburse from my own cash many sums, which,

though required to enable me to execute the duties of my station, I have hitherto

omitted to enter in my public accounts, and my own fortune being unequal to so

heavy a charge, I have resolved to reimburse myself in a mode the most suitable to

the situation of your affairs, by charging the same in my Durbar accounts of the

present year, and crediting them by a sumprivately received, and appropriated to your

service in the same manner with other sums received on account of the Honorable

Company, and already carried to their account." That at the time of writing this letter

the said Warren Hastings had been in possession of the government of Fort William

about twelve years, with a clear salary, or avowed emoluments, at no time less than

twenty-five thousand pounds sterling a year, exclusive of which all the principal

expenses of his residence were paid for by the Company. That, if the services

mentioned by him were required to enable him to execute the duties of his station,

he ought not to have omitted to enter them in his public accounts at the times when

the expenses were incurred. That, if it was true, as he affirms, that, when he first

engaged in these expenses, he had no intention to carry them to the account of the

Company, there was no subsequent change in his situation which could justify his

departing from that intention. That, if his own fortune in the year 1784 was unequal

to so heavy a charge, the state of his fortune at any earlier period must have been still

more unequal to so heavy a charge. That the fact so asserted by the said Warren

Hastings leads directly to an inference palpably false and absurd, viz., that, the longer

a Governor-General holds that lucrative office, the poorer he must become. That

neither would the assertion, if it were true, nor the inference, if it were admitted,

justify the conduct avowed by the said Warren Hastings in resolving to reimburse

himself out of the Company's property without their consent or knowledge.That

the account transmitted in this letter is styled by himself an aggregate of a contingent

account of twelve years; that all contingent accounts should be submitted to those

who ought to have an official control over them, at annual or other shorter periods,

in order that the expense already incurred may be checked and examined, and similar

expenses, if disapproved of, may be prohibited in time; that, after a very long period

is elapsed, all check and control over such expenses is impracticable, and, if it were

practicable in the present instance, would be completely useless, since the said

Warren Hastings, without waiting for the consent of the Directors, did resolve to

reimburse himself. That the conduct of the said Warren Hastings, in withholding

these accounts for twelve years together, and then resolving to reimburse himself

without the consent of his employers, has been fraudulent in the first instance, and in

the second amounts to a denial and mockery of the authority placed over him by law;

and that he has thereby set a dangerous example to his successors, and to every man

in trust or office under him. That the mode in which he has reimbursed himself is

a crime of a much higher order, and greatly aggravates whatever was already criminal

in the other parts of this transaction. That the said Warren Hastings, in declaring that

he should reimburse himself by crediting the Company by a sum privately received,

has acknowledged himself guilty of an illegal act in receiving money privately. That

he has suppressed or withheld every particular which could throw any light on a

conduct so suspicious in a Governor as the private receipt of money. That the general

confession of the private receipt of a large sum in gross, in which no circumstance

of time, place, occasion, or person, nor even the amount, is specified, tends to cover

or protect any act of the same nature (as far as a general confession can protect such

acts) which may be detected hereafter, and which in fact may not make part of the

gross sum so confessed, and that it tends to perplex and defeat all inquiry into such

practices. That the said Warren Hastings, in stating to the Directors that he has

resolved to reimburse himself in a mode the most suitable to the situation of their

affairs, viz., by receiving money privately against law, has stated a presumption

highly injurious to the integrity of the said Directors, viz., that they will not object

to, or even inquire into, any extraordinary expenses incurred and charged by their

Governors in India, provided such expenses are reimbursed by money privately and

illegally received. That he has not explained what that situation of their affairs was

or could be to which so dangerous and corrupt a principle was or might be applied.

That no evidence has been produced to prove that it was true, nor any ground of

argument stated to show that it might be credible, that any native of India had

voluntarily and gratuitously given money privately to the said Warren Hastings, that

is, without some prospect of a benefit in return, or some dread of his resentment, if

he refused. That it is not a thing to be believed, that any native would give large sums

privately to a Governor, which he refused to give or lend publicly to government,

unless it were to derive some adequate secret advantage from the favor, or to avoid

some mischief from the enmity of such Governor.That the late confessions made

by the said Warren Hastings of money received against law are no proof that he did

not originally intend to appropriate the same to his own use, such confessions having

been made at a suspicious moment, when, and not before, he was apprised of the

inquiries commenced in the House of Commons, and when a dread of the

consequence of those inquiries might act upon his mind. That such confessions, from

the obscure, intricate, and contradictory manner in which they are made, imply guilt

in the said Warren Hastings, as far as they go; that they do not furnish any color of

reason to conclude that he has confessed all the money which he may have corruptly

received; but that, on the contrary, they warrant a just and reasonable presumption,

that, in discovering some part of the bribes he had received, he hoped to lull

suspicion, and thereby conceal and secure the rest.

That the Court of Directors, when the former accounts of these transactions came

before them, did show an evident disposition not to censure the said Warren Hastings,

but to give the most favorable construction to his conduct; that, nevertheless, they

found themselves obliged "to confess that the statement of those transactions

appeared to them in many parts so unintelligible, that they felt themselves under the

necessity of calling on the Governor-General for an explanation, agreeably to his

promise voluntarily made to them." That their letter, containing this requisition, was

received in Bengal in the month of August, 1784, and that the said Warren Hastings

did not embark for England until the 2d of February, 1785, but made no reply to that

letter before his departure, owing, as he has since said, to a variety of other more

important occupations. That, under pretence of such occupations, he neglected to

transmit to the Court of Directors a copy of a paper which, he says, contained

the only account he ever kept of the transaction. That such a paper, or a copy of it,

might have been transmitted without interrupting other important occupations, if any

could be more important than that of giving a clear and satisfactory answer to the

requisition of the Directors. That since his arrival in England he has written a letter

to the chairman of that court, professedly in answer to their letter above mentioned,

but in fact giving no explanation or satisfaction whatsoever on the points which they

had declared to be unintelligible. That the terms of his letter are ambiguous and

obscure, such as a guilty man might have recourse to in order to cover his guilt, but

such as no innocent man, from whom nothing was required but to clear his innocence

by giving plain answers to plain questions, could possibly have made use of. That in

his letter of the 11th of July, 1785, he says, "that he has been kindly apprised that the

information required as above was yet expected from him: that the submission which

his respect would have enjoined him to pay to the command imposed on him was

lost to his recollection, perhaps from the stronger impression which the first and

distant perusal of it had left on his mind that it was rather intended as a reprehension

for something which had given offence in his report of the original transaction than

as expressive of any want of a further elucidation of it."[2]

That the said Warren Hastings, in affecting to doubt whether the information

expressly required of him by his employers was expected or not, has endeavored to

justify a criminal delay and evasion in giving it. That, considering the importance of

the subject, and the recent date of the command, it is not possible that it could be lost

to his recollection; much less is it possible that he could have understood the specific

demand of an answer to specific questions to be intended only as a reprehension for

a former offence, viz., the offence of withholding from the Directors that very

explanation which he ought to have given in the first instance. That the said Warren

Hastings, in his answer to the said questions, cautiously avoids affirming or denying

anything in clear, positive terms, and professes to recollect nothing with absolute

certainty. That he has not, even now, informed the Directors of the name of any one

person from whom any part of the money in question was received, nor what was the

motive of any one person for giving the same. That he has, indeed, declared, that his

motive for lending to the Company, or depositing in their treasury in his own name,

money which he has in other places declared to be their property, was to avoid

ostentation, and that lending the money was the least liable to reflection; yet, when

he has stated these and other conjectural motives for his own conduct, he declares he

will not affirm, though he is firmly persuaded, that those were his sentiments on the

occasion. That of one thing only the said Warren Hastings declares he is certain, viz.,

"that it was his design originally to have concealed the receipt of all the sums, except

the second, even from the knowledge of the Court of Directors, but that, when fortune

threw a sum in his way of a magnitude which could not be concealed, and the peculiar

delicacy of his situation at the time in which he received it made him more

circumspect of appearances, he chose to apprise his employers of it." That the said

Warren Hastings informs the Directors, that he had indorsed the bonds taken by him

for money belonging to the Company, and lent by him to the Company, in order to

guard against their becoming a claim on the Company, as part of his estate, in the

event of his death; but he has not affirmed, nor does it anywhere appear, that he has

surrendered the said bonds, as he ought to have done. That the said Warren Hastings,

in affirming that he had not time to answer the questions put to him by the Directors,

while he was in Bengal, in not bringing with him to England the documents

necessary to enable him to answer those questions, or in pretending that he has not

brought them, in referring the Directors back again to Bengal for those documents,

and for any further information on a subject on which he has given them no

information, and particularly in referring them back to a person in Bengal for a

paper which he says contained the only account he ever kept of the transaction, while

he himself professes to doubt whether that paper be still in being, whether it be in the

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/13968/13968-h/13968-h.htm#Footnote_2_2

hands of that person, or whether that person can recollect anything distinctly

concerning it, has been guilty of gross evasions, and of palpable prevarication and

deceit, as well as of contumacy and disobedience to the lawful orders of the Court of

Directors, and thereby confirmed all the former evidence of his having constantly

used the influence of his station for the most scandalous, illegal, and corrupt

purposes.

IX. RESIGNATION OF THE OF FICE OF

GOVERNOR-GENERAL.

That Warren Hastings having by his agent, Lauchlan Macleane, Esquire, on the

10th day of October, in the year 1776, "signified to the Court of Directors his desire

to resign his office of Governor-General of Bengal, and requested their nomination

of a successor to the vacancy which would be thereby occasioned in the Supreme

Council," the Court of Directors did thereupon desire the said Lauchlan Macleane

"to inform them of the authority under which he acted in a point of such very great

importance"; and the said Lauchlan Macleane "signifying thereupon his readiness to

give the court every possible satisfaction on that subject, but the powers with which

he was intrusted by the papers in his custody being mixed with other matters of a

nature extremely confidential, he would submit the same to the inspection of any

three of the members of the court," the said Court of Directors empowered the

Chairman, Deputy Chairman, and Richard Becher, Esquire, to inspect the authorities,

powers, and directions with which Mr. Macleane was furnished by Mr. Hastings to

make the propositions contained in his letter of the 10th October, 1776, and to report

their opinion thereon. And the said committee did accordingly, on the 23d of the said

month, report, "that, having conferred with Mr. Macleane on the subject of his letter

presented to the court the 11th instant, they found, that, from the purport of Mr.

Hastings's instructions, contained in a paper in his own handwriting given to Mr.

Macleane, and produced by him to them, Mr. Hastings declared he would not

continue in the government of Bengal, unless certain conditions therein specified

could be obtained, of which they saw no probability; and Mr. George Vansittart had

declared to them, that he was present when these instructions were given to Mr.

Macleane, and when Mr. Hastings empowered Mr. Macleane to declare his

resignation to the said court; that Mr. Stewart had likewise confirmed to them, that

Mr. Hastings declared to him, that he had given directions to the above purpose by

Mr. Macleane."

And the Court of Directors, having received from the said report due satisfaction

respecting the authority vested in the said Lauchlan Macleane to propose the said

resignation of the office of Governor-General of Bengal, did unanimously resolve to

accept the same, and did also, under powers vested in the said court by the act of the

13th year of his present Majesty, "nominate and appoint Edward Wheler, Esquire, to

succeed to the office in the Council of Fort William in Bengal which will become

vacant by the said resignation, if such nomination shall be approved by his Majesty":

which nomination and appointment was afterwards in due form approved and

confirmed by his Majesty.

That the Court of Directors did, by a postscript to their general letter, dated 25th

October, 1776, acquaint the Governor-General and Council at Calcutta of their

acceptance of the said resignation, of their appointment of Edward Wheler, Esquire,

to fill the said vacancy, and of his Majesty's approbation of the said appointment,

together with the grounds of their said proceedings; and did transmit to the said

Governor-General and Council copies of the said instruments of appointment and

confirmation.

That the said dispatches from the Court of Directors were received at Calcutta, and

were read in Council on the 19th day of June, in the year 1777; and that Warren

Hastings, Esquire, having taken no steps to yield the government to his successor,

General Clavering, and having observed a profound silence on the subject of the said

dispatches, he, the said General Clavering, did, on the next day, being the 20th of

June, by a letter addressed to the said Warren Hastings, require him to surrender the

keys of Fort William, and of the Company's treasuries; but the said Warren Hastings

did positively refuse to comply with the said requisition, "denying that his office was

vacated, and declaring his resolution to assert and maintain his authority by every

legal means."

That the said General Clavering, conceiving that the office of Governor-General

was vacated by the arrival of the said dispatches, which acquainted the Council-

General of the resignation of the said Warren Hastings and the appointment of the

said Edward Wheler, Esquire, and that he, the said General Clavering, had in

consequence thereof legally succeeded, under the provisions of the act of the 13th

year of his present Majesty's reign, to the said office of Governor-General, become

vacant in the manner aforesaid, did, in virtue thereof, issue in his own name

summonses to Richard Barwell, Esquire, and Philip Francis, Esquire, members of

the Council, to attend the same, and in the presence of the said Philip Francis,

Esquire, who obeyed the said summons, did take the oaths as Governor-General, and

did sit and preside in Council as Governor-General, and prepared several acts and

resolutions in the said capacity of Governor-General, and did, amongst other things,

prepare a proclamation to be made of his said succession to the government, and of

its commencing from the date of the said proclamation, but did not carry any of the

acts or resolutions so prepared into execution.

The said Warren Hastings did, notwithstanding thereof, and in pursuance of his

resolution to assert and maintain his authority, illegally and unjustifiably summon

the Council to meet in another department, and did sit and preside therein, apart from

the said General Clavering and his Council, and, in conjunction with Richard

Barwell, Esquire, who concurred therein, issued sundry orders and did sundry acts

of government belonging to the office of Governor-General, and, amongst others,

did order several letters to be written in the name of the Governor-General and

Council, and did subscribe the same, to the commandant of the garrison of Fort

Wil liam, and to the commanding officer at Barrackpore, and to the commanding

officers at the other stations, and also to the provincial councils and collectors in the

provinces, enjoining them severally "to obey no orders excepting such as should be

signed by the said Warren Hastings, or a majority of his Council."

That the said Warren Hastings did, by the said proceedings, which were contrary

both to law and to good faith, constitute a double government, thereby destroying

and annihilating all government whatever; and, by his said orders to the military

officers, did prepare for open resistance by arms, exposing thereby the settlement,

and all the inhabitants, subjects of or dependent on the British government, whether

native or European, not only to political distractions, but to the horrors of civil war;

and did, by exposing the divisions and weakness of the supreme government, and

thereby loosening the obedience of the provinces, shake the whole foundation of

British authority, and imminently endanger the existence of the British nation in

India.

That the said evils were averted only by the moderation of the said General

Clavering and Philip Francis, Esquire, in consenting to a reference, and submitting

to the decision of the judges of the Supreme Court of Judicature, although they

entertained no doubts themselves on the legality of their proceedings and the validity

of General Clavering's instant right to the chair, and although they were not in any

way bound by law to consult the said judges, who had no legal or judicial authority

therein in virtue of their offices or as a court of justice, but were consulted, and

interposed their advice, only as individuals, by the voluntary reference of the parties

in the said dispute. And the said Warren Hastings, by his declaration, entered in

Minutes of Council, "that it was his determination to abide by the opinion of the

judges," and by the measures he had previously taken as aforesaid to enforce the

same by arms, did risk all the dangerous consequences above mentioned: which must

have taken place, if the said General Clavering and Philip Francis, Esquire, had not

been more tender of the public interests, and less tenacious of their own rights, and

had persisted in their claim, as they were by law entitled to do, the extra-judicial

interposition of the judges notwithstanding; and from which claim they receded only

from their desire to preserve the peace of the settlement, and to prevent the mischiefs

which the illegal resistance of the said Warren Hastings would otherwise i